How to assess your learners using the GSE Assessment Frameworks

Billie Jago
Billie Jago
A teachet stood in front of a class in front of a board, smiling at his students.
Reading time: 4 minutes

With language learning, assessing both the quality and the quantity of language use is crucial for accurate proficiency evaluation. While evaluating quantity (for example the number of words written or the duration of spoken production) can provide insights into a learner's fluency and engagement in a task, it doesn’t show a full picture of a learner’s language competence. For this, they would also need to be evaluated on the quality of what they produce (such as the appropriateness, accuracy and complexity of language use). The quality also considers factors such as grammatical accuracy, lexical choice, coherence and the ability to convey meaning effectively.

In order to measure the quality of different language skills, you can use the Global Scale of English (GSE) assessment frameworks.

Developed in collaboration with assessment experts, the GSE Assessment Frameworks are intended to be used alongside the GSE Learning Objectives to help you assess the proficiency of your learners.

There are two GSE Assessment Frameworks: one for adults and one for young learners.

What are the GSE Assessment Frameworks?

  • The GSE Assessment Frameworks are intended to be used alongside the GSE Learning Objectives to help teachers assess their learners’ proficiency of all four skills (speaking, listening, reading and writing).
  • The GSE Learning Objectives focus on the things a learner can do, while the GSE Assessment Frameworks focus on how well a learner can do these things.
  • It can help provide you with examples of what proficiencies your learners should be demonstrating.ÌýÌý
  • It can help teachers pinpoint students' specific areas of strength and weakness more accurately, facilitating targeted instruction and personalized learning plans.
  • It can also help to motivate your learners, as their progress is evidenced and they can see a clear path for improvement.

An example of the GSE Assessment Frameworks

This example is from the Adult Assessment Framework for speaking.

As you can see, there are sub-skills within speaking (andÌýfor the other three main overarching skills – writing, listening and reading). Within speaking, these areÌýproductionÌýandÌýfluency, spoken interaction, language range andÌýaccuracy.

The GSE range (and corresponding CEFR level) is shown at the top of each column, and there are descriptors that students should ideally demonstrate at that level.

However, it is important to note that students may sit across different ranges, depending on the sub-skill. For example, your student may show evidence of GSE 43-50 production and fluency and spoken interaction, but they may need to improve their language range and accuracy, and therefore sit in a range of GSE 36-42 for these sub-skills.

The GSE assessment frameworks in practiceÌý– let’s try

So, how can you use these frameworks as a teacher in your lesson? Let’s look at an example.

Imagine you are teaching a class of adult learners at GSE 43-50 (B1). This week, your class has been working towards writing an essay about living in the city vs the countryside. Your class has just written their final essay and you want to assess what they have produced.

Look at the writing sub-skills in the GSE Assessment Framework for adults. Imagine these are the criteria you are using to assess your students’ writing.

You read one of your student's essays, and in their essay they demonstrate that they can:

  • Express their opinion on the advantages and disadvantages of living in the city vs the countryside
  • Make relevant points which are mostly on-topic
  • Use topic-related language
  • Connect their ideas logically and in a way that flows well
  • Write in clear paragraphs

However, you notice that:

  • They tend to repeat common words, such as city, town, countryside, nice, busy
  • They don’t use punctuation effectively, for example missing commas, long sentences, missing capitalization
  • They have some issues with grammatical structures

Compare the above notes to the GSE Assessment Frameworks. What level is your learner demonstrating in each sub-skill? How could you evidence this using the criteria?

Now, compare your answers to the ideas below.

The points marked in the GSE 43-50 column are evidence that the student is at the expected writing level for their class, based on what you observed in their essay. The points marked in the GSE 36-42 column could be shown to the student to tell them what they need to focus on to improve, based on their essay.

Customizing the GSE assessment frameworks

The GSE Assessment Frameworks are flexible and customizable, and you can use the descriptors for your specific purpose. You can choose the appropriate GSE Assessment Frameworks for your context, and build your own formative assessment based on these.

In the example above, you were only assessing an essay, so you could ignore any contexts that were not applicable to that scenario. For example, writes personal and semi-formal letters and emails relating to everyday matters, or incorporates some relevant details from external sources.

Another benefit of the frameworks is that you can personalize assessments and create tailored learning roadmaps for individual students. Of course, not all learners are the same, so the descriptors allow students to see which sub-skill they need to work on in order to bring their writing (or speaking, listening or reading) up to their expected level. It also helps you as the teacher to understand what sub-skills to focus on in lessons to improve these main skills.

Finally, don’t be afraid to introduce your students to these descriptors or translate them into the learner's first language for lower levels. It is a great way for them to pinpoint and reflect on their strengths and areas for improvement, rather than simply getting a score and not understanding how to get to the next level of confidence and ability.

By incorporating the GSE Assessment Frameworks into your course for formative assessment, you can build students’ confidence and help them better reflect on their learning.

Learn more about the GSE

More blogs from ÃÛÌÒapp

  • A group of business people sat together at a desk

    Harness the power of English for a global competitive edge

    By Samantha Ball
    Reading time: 7 minutes

    How does increasing English proficiency drive international growth? Read on to find out how future-focused business leaders are gaining a competitive edge globally by investing in English language training.

    The link between English language proficiency and global business growth is indisputable, and this presents leaders with an exciting opportunity to gain a competitive advantage.

  • A girl sat at a desk with a laptop and notepad studying and taking notes

    AI scoring vs human scoring for language tests: What's the difference?

    By
    Reading time: 6 minutes

    When entering the world of language proficiency tests, test takers are often faced with a dilemma: Should they opt for tests scored by humans or those assessed by artificial intelligence (AI)? The choice might seem trivial at first, but understanding the differences between AI scoring and human language test scoring can significantly impact preparation strategy and, ultimately, determine test outcomes.

    The human touch in language proficiency testing and scoring

    Historically, language tests have been scored by human assessors. This method leverages the nuanced understanding that humans have of language, including idiomatic expressions, cultural references, and the subtleties of tone and even writing style, akin to the capabilities of the human brain. Human scorers can appreciate the creative and original use of language, potentially rewarding test takers for flair and originality in their answers. Scorers are particularly effective at evaluating progress or achievement tests, which are designed to assess a student's language knowledge and progress after completing a particular chapter, unit, or at the end of a course, reflecting how well the language tester is performing in their language learning studies.

    One significant difference between human and AI scoring is how they handle context. Human scorers can understand the significance and implications of a particular word or phrase in a given context, while AI algorithms rely on predetermined rules and datasets.

    The adaptability and learning capabilities of human brains contribute significantly to the effectiveness of scoring in language tests, mirroring how these brains adjust and learn from new information.

    Advantages:

    • Nuanced understanding: Human scorers are adept at interpreting the complexities and nuances of language that AI might miss.
    • Contextual flexibility: Humans can consider context beyond the written or spoken word, understanding cultural and situational implications.

    Disadvantages:

    • Subjectivity and inconsistency: Despite rigorous training, human-based scoring can introduce a level of subjectivity and variability, potentially affecting the fairness and reliability of scores.
    • Time and resource intensive: Human-based scoring is labor-intensive and time-consuming, often resulting in longer waiting times for results.
    • Human bias: Assessors, despite being highly trained and experienced, bring their own perspectives, preferences and preconceptions into the grading process. This can lead to variability in scoring, where two equally competent test takers might receive different scores based on the scorer's subjective judgment.

    The rise of AI in language test scoring

    With advancements in technology, AI-based scoring systems have started to play a significant role in language assessment. These systems utilize algorithms and natural language processing (NLP) techniques to evaluate test responses. AI scoring promises objectivity and efficiency, offering a standardized way to assess language and proficiency level.

    Advantages:

    • Consistency: AI scoring systems provide a consistent scoring method, applying the same criteria across all test takers, thereby reducing the potential for bias.
    • Speed: AI can process and score tests much faster than human scorers can, leading to quicker results turnaround.
    • Great for more nervous testers: Not everyone likes having to take a test in front of a person, so AI removes that extra stress.

    Disadvantages:

    • Lack of nuance recognition: AI may not fully understand subtle nuances, creativity, or complex structures in language the way a human scorer can.
    • Dependence on data: The effectiveness of AI scoring is heavily reliant on the data it has been trained on, which can limit its ability to interpret less common responses accurately.

    Making the choice

    When deciding between tests scored by humans or AI, consider the following factors:

    • Your strengths: If you have a creative flair and excel at expressing original thoughts, human-scored tests might appreciate your unique approach more. Conversely, if you excel in structured language use and clear, concise expression, AI-scored tests could work to your advantage.
    • Your goals: Consider why you're taking the test. Some organizations might prefer one scoring method over the other, so it's worth investigating their preferences.
    • Preparation time: If you're on a tight schedule, the quicker turnaround time of AI-scored tests might be beneficial.

    Ultimately, both scoring methods aim to measure and assess language proficiency accurately. The key is understanding how each approach aligns with your personal strengths and goals.

    The bias factor in language testing

    An often-discussed concern in both AI and human language test scoring is the issue of bias. With AI scoring, biases can be ingrained in the algorithms due to the data they are trained on, but if the system is well designed, bias can be removed and provide fairer scoring.

    Conversely speaking, human scorers, despite their best efforts to remain objective, bring their own subconscious biases to the evaluation process. These biases might be related to a test taker's accent, dialect, or even the content of their responses, which could subtly influence the scorer's perceptions and judgments. Efforts are continually made to mitigate these biases in both approaches to ensure a fair and equitable assessment for all test takers.

    Preparing for success in foreign language proficiency tests

    Regardless of the scoring method, thorough preparation remains, of course, crucial. Familiarize yourself with the test format, practice under timed conditions, and seek feedback on your performance, whether from teachers, peers, or through self-assessment tools.

    The distinctions between AI scoring and human in language tests continue to blur, with many exams now incorporating a mix of both to have students leverage their respective strengths. Understanding and interpreting written language is essential in preparing for language proficiency tests, especially for reading tests. By understanding these differences, test takers can better prepare for their exams, setting themselves up for the best possible outcome.

    Will AI replace human-marked tests?

    The question of whether AI will replace markers in language tests is complex and multifaceted. On one hand, the efficiency, consistency and scalability of AI scoring systems present a compelling case for their increased utilization. These systems can process vast numbers of tests in a fraction of the time it takes markers, providing quick feedback that is invaluable in educational settings. On the other hand, the nuanced understanding, contextual knowledge, flexibility, and ability to appreciate the subtleties of language that human markers bring to the table are qualities that AI has yet to fully replicate.

    Both AI and human-based scoring aim to accurately assess language proficiency levels, such as those defined by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or the Global Scale of English, where a level like C2 or 85-90 indicates that a student can understand virtually everything, master the foreign language perfectly, and potentially have superior knowledge compared to a native speaker.

    The integration of AI in language testing is less about replacement and more about complementing and enhancing the existing processes. AI can handle the objective, clear-cut aspects of language testing, freeing markers to focus on the more subjective, nuanced responses that require a human touch. This hybrid approach could lead to a more robust, efficient and fair assessment system, leveraging the strengths of both humans and AI.

    Future developments in AI technology and machine learning may narrow the gap between AI and human grading capabilities. However, the ethical considerations, such as ensuring fairness and addressing bias, along with the desire to maintain a human element in education, suggest that a balanced approach will persist. In conclusion, while AI will increasingly play a significant role in language testing, it is unlikely to completely replace markers. Instead, the future lies in finding the optimal synergy between technological advancements and human judgment to enhance the fairness, accuracy and efficiency of language proficiency assessments.

    Tests to let your language skills shine through

    Explore ÃÛÌÒapp's innovative language testing solutions today and discover how we are blending the best of AI technology and our own expertise to offer you reliable, fair and efficient language proficiency assessments. We are committed to offering reliable and credible proficiency tests, ensuring that our certifications are recognized for job applications, university admissions, citizenship applications, and by employers worldwide. Whether you're gearing up for academic, professional, or personal success, our tests are designed to meet your diverse needs and help unlock your full potential.

    Take the next step in your language learning journey with ÃÛÌÒapp and experience the difference that a meticulously crafted test can make.

  • Woman standing outside with a coffee and headphones

    Using language learning as a form of self-care for wellbeing

    By
    Reading time: 6.5 minutes

    In today’s fast-paced world, finding time for self-care is more important than ever. Among a range of traditional self-care practices, learning a language emerges as an unexpected but incredibly rewarding approach. Learning a foreign language is a key aspect of personal development and can help your mental health, offering benefits like improved career opportunities, enhanced creativity, and the ability to connect with people from diverse cultures.